Viable delivery of water and wastewater services 24/7/365 is the baseline expectation that individuals, communities and businesses have of their local water utilities. It’s both the law and a basic human right. The responsibility for clear water is why agencies and utilities must know their vulnerabilities, mitigate them and ultimately eliminate them, if possible. When elimination isn’t possible, resiliency is the next best option.
This is true with climate change. The Black & Veatch 2025 Water Report survey shows respondents are concerned about shifting weather patterns and increasingly extreme weather events. Their concerns align with areas where utilities feel especially vulnerable in delivering the level of service expected of them.
When asked which elements they would include in their definition of sustainability, 84% of respondents cited “infrastructure reliability,” up four percentage points from 2024. Seventy-two percent also include “water supply reliability” in their sustainability definition, ranking it second ahead of energy security and reliability (57%) (Figure 21).
Given the concerns around reliability, it would be expected that most, if not all, utilities would have completed studies. But, the numbers show only 61% of respondents have conducted them, identifying aging infrastructure (70%), water supply (67%), power supply (64%) and droughts (63%) as primary vulnerabilities. These susceptibilities are the same as or directly impacted by respondents’ top three climate change concerns: changing participation patterns/ floods, drought and aging infrastructure.
The survey also shows that utilities are actively mitigating climate-related risks, with:
hardening their water infrastructure (48%);
considering alternative water supplies (42%);
aiming to enhance their resilience through new processes or technologies in wastewater treatment (49%);
meanwhile, many have disaster response and recovery plans in place.
Altogether, we see a sector taking aim at the issue and adopting strategies and solutions to bolster its infrastructure, systems and practices. At the same time, as the survey shows, there is room to do more.
The top climate change concerns identified in the Black & Veatch survey highlight reduced concern in most areas:
Changing precipitation patterns. Flooding can overwhelm water treatment plants and distribution systems, causing contamination, service disruptions and damage to other infrastructure. Drought reduces water availability, stressing water supplies, impacting water quality and increasing the cost of water.
Aging infrastructure. Pipes, pumps, treatment facilities and other infrastructure at or beyond their service lives can be ill-equipped to handle extreme events and changing patterns.
The cost of inaction. While the adoption of new technologies and upgrades to infrastructure require significant investments, they can create operational efficiencies to lower costs and better guarantee public health and safety in the long term. Added resiliency efforts to combat climate impacts can improve service reliability.
Interestingly, the survey reveals a year-over-year decline in six out of eight climate concern areas, with two sustaining concern at a low level (16% and 12%). Worries about changing precipitation patterns/flooding dropped from 61% in 2023 to 54% now. Concern about drought slid from 53% in 2023 to 39% in 2025. Worries about aging infrastructure fell from 42% in 2023 to 38% this year, while concern about the cost of disruptive events declined from 46% in 2023 to 27% now (Figure 22).
The survey did not delve into why respondents seem less worried about these critical issues. However, Black & Veatch recent experience across the country points to how utilities have been addressing their vulnerabilities. Community water systems are required to do a risk and resilience assessment and update every five years. Many water utilities are now working through the second cycle of the requirement, indicating providers have developed a better understanding of their risks and are taking action to mitigate them.
Key strategies include addressing power reliability concerns through emergency backup generators, diversifying water resources against drought conditions, hardening systems against storm damage and implementing technologies like aquifer recharge and water reuse.
Utilities also have been readying themselves. Two-thirds of respondents have a disaster response plan, and an additional 11% are working on one. Nearly half of respondents (48%) have a disaster recovery blueprint or framework in place while 14% say that’s in the works.
These results indicate that utilities might be gaining confidence in their ability to manage impacts from climate change. This level of planning and readiness signals that utilities are not only acknowledging the risks but are also taking tangible steps to fortify their systems to manage future climate-related disruptions.
The survey showed a continued decline in collaboration between local water and electric utilities (Figure 23). Nearly all respondents reported having a backup power plan — predominantly diesel-powered generators. However, effective management of the interconnections between water and energy systems is crucial. This has the potential to become even more important with the explosive growth of data centers and associated demand for power.
Another trend revealed in this year’s report is a dropoff in utilities participating in their local Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hazard mitigation plan. Compared with results from 2024, 11% fewer this year said they were participating, 3% more said they were not participating and 9% more were unsure.
Some utilities may not fully understand the benefits of hazard mitigation planning or the requirements for participation. Some may prioritize other operational needs over long-term planning efforts. In any case, without active participation in hazard mitigation planning, water utilities may be less prepared to manage natural disasters, risking service disruptions, infrastructure damage and water quality compliance issues. Additionally, participation in FEMA’s hazard mitigation plans is often a prerequisite for accessing certain types of federal funding and grants. Utilities that don’t participate may miss out on financial assistance for critical infrastructure upgrades and resilience projects.
Nature-based solutions (NBS) are a tool that utilities can use to mitigate their climate change-related risks by applying natural processes and features such as wetlands and green infrastructure to address environmental and societal challenges.
When respondents were asked what’s driving their integration of NBS, stormwater quality management (33%) topped the list, followed by a tightly bunched grouping of priorities involving regulations (28%), infrastructure protection (26%), innovative wastewater treatment (26%), flood management (25%), reuse (24%) and groundwater recharge (22%). However, 26% of respondents said they either aren’t working on such solutions or were unsure about it. These results show potential that greater adoption of NBS may give utilities another avenue to address their climate-related vulnerabilities.
This year’s survey results underscore the importance of understanding one’s vulnerabilities and acting to mitigate them. By leveraging other strategies — from NBS and water conservation to digital water approaches — utilities can manage climate change even more effectively, keeping the clean water flowing as expected.
